Linked by Christian Schaller on Tue 19th Apr 2005 18:26 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Well, thank you for that Mr. Stevenson; it was extremely insightful. As far as I can tell from all this, software patents, while they may now not work as they should, are pretty important. While open source is important in software, it is only one business model, and the ability to patent software (especially that which is truly original) is important to the other business models. Most of the arguments I have seen against software patents are actually arguments in favor of reform of patents. This seems to be the route that those who would not have patents on software should take: to stop arguing for a structure that will never come about and is idealistic and to begin arguing for a reform in what is a pro-monopoly system. In my experience (which has been mostly with local and state politics, but which I believe is representative of all politics), petitioning for reform is always better received by politicians than petitioning for the doing away with a system completely. Hopefully some needed reforms will then take place. However, reforms will never be achieved through arguing that the system must be done away with.